Question abut atf in fuel filter clean up?

[ToughOldFord]

Of course it's anecdotal, real world testing is anecdotal. Doesn't make it inaccurate. If you know a guy that lost a hand in a meat grinder you can deduce that it's not wise to insert your hand in a meat grinder. If you know a lot of guys that lost their hands in meat grinders then you have support of the anecdote. (And a lot of stupid friends.)
So the ATF method is hardly unsupported, many have benefited from the use of it. If you chose to ignore this that's your choice, many refused to believe the earth was round too. Darn anecdotes.

 

[OLDBULL8]

My anecdotal. Traveling to Alaska stopped at a fuel station just outside of Whitehorse Yukon, filled up with 30 gallons of unleaded (by mistake) in a 40 gallon tank (not good in a diesel), drove to Carmac about 125 miles, half way there, nothing but **** knock, what the hell is wrong, had to return to Whitehorse as there is nothing for the next 800 miles. Pulling a 30 ft 5er, going up a mountain down to 10 MPH terrible knocking, well had two gallons of ATF along, so poured that in, much much better, up the mountains at 50 MPH, got to Whitehorse then that's when i drained the fuel filter and smelled gasoline, filled up with Diesel this time for sure, had 130K miles on the truck then, got 183K miles on it now, no problems, still running strong. I posted this incident long time ago, this is a short story of it. ATF is a hell'va lubricator if nothing else.

EDIT: At that time I did not have the 100 gal. bed tank in my sig 99 PSD.

 

[PwrSmoke]

My anecdotal. Traveling to Alaska stopped at a fuel station just outside of Whitehorse Yukon, filled up with 30 gallons of unleaded (by mistake) in a 40 gallon tank (not good in a diesel), drove to Carmac about 125 miles, half way there, nothing but **** knock, what the hell is wrong, had to return to Whitehorse as there is nothing for the next 800 miles. Pulling a 30 ft 5er, going up a mountain down to 10 MPH terrible knocking, well had two gallons of ATF along, so poured that in, much much better, up the mountains at 50 MPH, got to Whitehorse then that's when i drained the fuel filter and smelled gasoline, filled up with Diesel this time for sure, had 130K miles on the truck then, got 183K miles on it now, no problems, still running strong. I posted this incident long time ago, this is a short story of it. ATF is a hell'va lubricator if nothing else.

EDIT: At that time I did not have the 100 gal. bed tank in my sig 99 PSD.

Basically, engine oil or ATF would have down the same thing, probably also other types of lubes that didn't have wildly incompatible additives in them. And if you look at the Spicer lubricity test, which I noted above, you will see ATF is WAY down the list as far as diesel fuel lubricity goes, plus it isn't designed to be combusted so it leaves deposits.

 

[PwrSmoke]

Of course it's anecdotal, real world testing is anecdotal. Doesn't make it inaccurate. If you know a guy that lost a hand in a meat grinder you can deduce that it's not wise to insert your hand in a meat grinder. If you know a lot of guys that lost their hands in meat grinders then you have support of the anecdote. (And a lot of stupid friends.)
So the ATF method is hardly unsupported, many have benefited from the use of it. If you chose to ignore this that's your choice, many refused to believe the earth was round too. Darn anecdotes.

Real world test is most assuredly NOT anecdotal , unless you are using "real world" as a synonym for "half-assed," "half-baked" or "it-does-what-I-say-it does-regardless-of-the-facts."

The cause and effect of your hand-in-the-grinder example works because it's a simple one: You know a grinder grinds meat. A hand is meat, therefore the grinder will grind it.

The ATF thing is a LOT less clear because the truth of it has not been tested. Sure, some people have done it and claim to see beneficial results but if you give me any such anecdotal examples, I can tear it apart with alternate possibilities. On top of that, the physical properties of ATF make it unlikely to be a very effective in the role as describe. Especially versus products that are designed for the purpose.

Hey, maybe it works, or works to some degree. It's obvious that I have strong, scientifically based doubts on it's effectiveness, but as far as I'm concerned it's still an open question with the preponderance of the evidence leaning against.

It won't bother me at all if someone eventually proves it's the best thing since ***, but it's going to take a lot more than internet anecdotes to do that.

 

[ToughOldFord]

So when someone's having problems with stalling out, they add the ATF and the problem is gone they're lying? Their truck is in reality still stalling out and they're just making a claim to back up a specific theory?

Or can it be that you're ignoring the real world results because it doesn't coincide with your belief?

 

[PwrSmoke]

There are a a dozen reasons why a problem could come and go BESIDES the ATF having fixed it.

Obviously, your ego is tied up in being "right." You don't know how to debate facts without getting your ****** in an uproar, or you wouldn't have resorted to deliberately distorting my words.

My only interest is proving or disproving the theory. I'm just as happy if someone could prove the theory and show me how it works but thus far the only thing used to counter my side is petulance and innuendo. I'll just back out of here now and save my time for more deserving debaters.

 

[ToughOldFord]

Methinks thou protests too much. A wee bit of projecting perhaps?

There are a a dozen reasons why a problem could come and go BESIDES the ATF having fixed it.

Obviously, your ego is tied up in being "right." You don't know how to debate facts without getting your ****** in an uproar, or you wouldn't have resorted to deliberately distorting my words.

My only interest is proving or disproving the theory. I'm just as happy if someone could prove the theory and show me how it works but thus far the only thing used to counter my side is petulance and innuendo. I'll just back out of here now and save my time for more deserving debaters.

 

[79jasper]

Maybe if Mel has some free time and a spare working core pump, he could do a before and after comparison with a teardown showing pics and such.
I don't know, just an idea. Be interesting to see.

Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-G890A using Tapatalk

 

[fsmyth]

You guys are demonstrating perfect examples of unsupported anecdotes. You don't know what the original problem was. You don't know how, why or if it was the ATF that cured it. But you are willing die on that anecdotal hill. Not saying that to provoke or anger you, just to encourage you to step outside the box you are in on that particular topic.

ssmyth are you saying you use ATF in chainsaws instead of two-stroke oil, or are you saying you add two stroke oil to your fuel? If the former, I pity your chainsaws. If the latter, that big Spicer lubricity test in the mid-2000s proved ashless two-stoke oil was a great lubricity enhancer for diesel fuel, better than some special additives sold for the purpose. Way, way (did I say WAY) better than ATF, which has very little effect on fuel lubricity. Pitifully so, in fact. Google "Spicer lubricity test" or something similar and you will see the ratings.

You are correct. I was sorta lumping 2-stroke oil and ATF in the same category.
My bad. There are obviously important differences between the two, but my
IDI doesn't seem to care
I had it in my mind that the detergents were similar. Could be wrong.

 

[riotwarrior]

Cough...urban legends...cough

Maybe this is one for "Myth Busters" eh?

 

[PwrSmoke]

You are correct. I was sorta lumping 2-stroke oil and ATF in the same category.
My bad. There are obviously important differences between the two, but my
IDI doesn't seem to care
I had it in my mind that the detergents were similar. Could be wrong.

Two stroke oil has some detergents but it's mostly added for lubrication and it's designed to combust without leaving deposits. That's why it's a pretty good lubricity additive for diesel fuel.

As I have said before, ATF DOES NOT have a very robust detergency package (compared to motor oil) because an automatic transmission is a closed environment. An engine is ingesting dirty air (the air filter always lets some dirt thru) and the combustion process adds to the contamination. Also, ATF is not designed to combust, so it will leave deposits when it burns. Finally, it adds very little lubricity to the fuel... even versus pump fuel with the correct amount of additive or especially fuel treated with an supplemental additive.. or even 2-stroke oil. Doesn't do much harm but it doesn't do much good either. Just a waste. The possible saving grace to some modern ATF formulations is that some contain esters which can be good solvents. It all depends on the type and how it works on whatever sort of gunk there may be in an injection pump. Still hoping Mell will chime in on what sorts of gunk he might see inside pumps and how much it interferes with the injection system.

 

[FORDF250HDXLT]

Sure, some people have done it and claim to see beneficial results

It won't bother me at all if someone eventually proves it's the best thing since ***, but it's going to take a lot more than internet anecdotes to do that.

and it wont bother me if my claim falls on deaf ears with disbelieve,discredit and you chose to toss out my personal results if you want.no ones trying to convince you of anything.

 

[Andertusa]

My anecdotal. Traveling to Alaska stopped at a fuel station just outside of Whitehorse Yukon, filled up with 30 gallons of unleaded (by mistake) in a 40 gallon tank (not good in a diesel), drove to Carmac about 125 miles, half way there, nothing but **** knock, what the hell is wrong, had to return to Whitehorse as there is nothing for the next 800 miles. Pulling a 30 ft 5er, going up a mountain down to 10 MPH terrible knocking, well had two gallons of ATF along, so poured that in, much much better, up the mountains at 50 MPH, got to Whitehorse then that's when i drained the fuel filter and smelled gasoline, filled up with Diesel this time for sure, had 130K miles on the truck then, got 183K miles on it now, no problems, still running strong. I posted this incident long time ago, this is a short story of it. ATF is a hell'va lubricator if nothing else.

I could be and very-well might be wrong in this, but your adding unleaded to your truck and running it for hours likely did FAR more to 'clean' your system than the ATF afterwards. The lubricating ability of the ATF wouldn't really be at-issue here as it must be to withstand the pressures and lubricate the insides of an automatic. The real issue is that when you added the ATF you diluted the gas with a thicker product that in-turn modified the combustion properties of the fuel you added, thus reducing adverse and undesirable engine knocking. The gasoline isn't designed to run in a diesel and auto-ignites in the air prematurely, thus the undesirable knocking, or more precisely 'pinging'. You are lucky to not have caused SERIOUS damage to your truck. Sorry if that sounds '****-ish'.

What PowerSmoke( Jim, I believe is his name) is getting at isn't that the 'trick' might be bogus or that it's a lie or those that have anecdotal evidence are lying; he is getting at the concept that until there have been specific tests to analyse the reported 'facts' that they aren't facts. Once there has been concise testing, there it will be Empirical evidence, on-way of the other.

He is also saying that this 'trick' is being used seemingly as a 'cure-all' without really understanding the reason why the engine is acting up, which could be anything from air in the system to a failed fuel filter to water in the system to an overly worn fuel distribution lobe in the I.P., but this is being touted seemingly as the 'magical' cure when it's treating a symptom, not the disease.

 

[ToughOldFord]

and it wont bother me if my claim falls on deaf ears with disbelieve,discredit and you chose to toss out my personal results if you want.no ones trying to convince you of anything.

That's a good thing too, since he refuses to let facts get in the way of his belief.

 

[fsmyth]

Two stroke oil has some detergents but it's mostly added for lubrication and it's designed to combust without leaving deposits. That's why it's a pretty good lubricity additive for diesel fuel.

As I have said before, ATF DOES NOT have a very robust detergency package (compared to motor oil) because an automatic transmission is a closed environment. An engine is ingesting dirty air (the air filter always lets some dirt thru) and the combustion process adds to the contamination. Also, ATF is not designed to combust, so it will leave deposits when it burns. Finally, it adds very little lubricity to the fuel... even versus pump fuel with the correct amount of additive or especially fuel treated with an supplemental additive.. or even 2-stroke oil. Doesn't do much harm but it doesn't do much good either. Just a waste. The possible saving grace to some modern ATF formulations is that some contain esters which can be good solvents. It all depends on the type and how it works on whatever sort of gunk there may be in an injection pump. Still hoping Mell will chime in on what sorts of gunk he might see inside pumps and how much it interferes with the injection system.

My whole post was in the context of a N/A IDI. It has burned some stuff that simply
amazes me. And seems happy for the most part. It absolutely LOVES hydraulic oil
My waste ATF goes in it's own drum. If I get a good batch of 70/30, I will add it to that.
Otherwise, I use a 85/15 WMO/RUG mix. Still keep the side tank straight #2, just in case.
The WMO and ATF mixes seem to burn almost as clean as #2. Very little additional smoke.
The only other truck I had that would burn all this and be happy was a Mack.
The John Deere is OK with it also, but I alternate straight and mixed tanks.
The Cummins gets #2 and ashless 2-stroke at 200:1. Only.